Member Info for bluerill

hey, I know money heaven. It's the place you don't get to go to if you try and dress up your own transparently craven desires as an effort to help others. You do that and you end up in the other place I reckon.

Careful who you call a letter jumble, sunshine. I'm not one of your little friends who give each other share tips during bingo breaks. My point is a little more subtle than your bouncy castle brain can process that quickly. Cash levels are only relevant for a growth company if it doesn't have any OR has no access to it at a reasonable price. If the latter is true, the former is meaningless. And I'm telling you for free that that is the enviable situation Zoe finds itself in, so absolutely ANY attempt to try and further winnifrith's ignorant effort to create some kind of concern among shareholders here will be treated with the utmost contempt, whether you understand the point or not.

So? Zoe has commitments for twice that if and when it needs it. What's your point?

My post on the framework these trolls use could not have been better timed: This 'drop' from yet another 'article', now regarding a cash position these creatures know less than nothing about, is perfectly par for the course. They simply keep bouncing from one impossible-to-know-but-a-serious-problem-if-it's-correct-which-it-isn't-but-who-cares-no one-is-going-to-stop-us-from-alledging-it-anyway to the other to try and maintain fear and loathing. In sharp contrast however, here is something I KNOW to be true: If zoetic, for absolutely ANY reason -- from working capital to an acquisition to hiring more salespeople to upgrading their toilets -- needed to raise ANY amount of equity capital, they could do so at the drop of a troll and likely at a PREMIUM to today's price. And you can take that back to that toothless never-was and shove right down his pie hole.

I have just published the following on the advfn board and am reprinting it here bc I think its important to try and attack the 'how' of a tw hit job as that gets far less attention than the 'what': '....The real issue here is of course, What's the use in 'responding' to a such a morally compromised 'group' in the first place? This entire toothless exercise is so infuriatingly familiar -- the 80 page innuendo-laden, triple-spaced message board cut-and-pastes whale turd, followed by hysterical accusations and threats, followed by a 'group' of shame-free keyboard warriors and their pious declarations of bad faith dealings by anyone who would defend the extraordinary progress Zoe have made in the biggest growth story in consumer products in a generation -- is ENTIRELY in aid of a purposefully constructed gordian knot around this debate. Nothing of consequence has been alleged that isn't either made up (e.g., false medical claims, our smokes containing chemicals), already refuted (e.g.,the non-issue of having reported that 'all' sales were on-line for the Sep20 year-end) or so trivial (a small, hyper-growth company updating its website?!?!? horror!)that is quickly obvious they are only raised to annoy and distract. Refute any major accusation, and they conveniently forget and repeatedly snark that it hasn't been 'refuted' anyway. Angrily reject nonsensical claims they pull from their anal, they accuse you of avoiding the specifics. Remind them that no company at this stage of explosive growth is problem-free and that actually finding faults is not some kind of 'gotcha' moment, and they go out and play 'gotcha' anyway. Point out that the market has 'read' and digested this whale turd and voted with their hard-earned dough and taken the share price HIGHER, and they ominously make evidence-free threats that some alphabet soup of government 'gencies' are about to come knocking on the company's door and shut it down - a 'claim' they know full well is essentially denial-proof as no one can 'prove' a negative - you know, because tom got a boilerplate response email from the FCA. Call winnifrith what he is, a bogus financial professional and serial failure who continuously flouts ethical norms by remaining unregulated, and they tell you the one time he stood on real analysts' shoulders to claim ownership of an idea that actually worked. Or of course, that his reputation is somehow irrelevant when, of course, it is everything....'

What an odd little post, describing Voyager as 'our opposition' and then as 'complementary'. How needlessly contradictory. Voyager and Nick will doubtless attempt to enter zoe's space but are of course years behind and probably won't achieve a public listing for at least 6 months, if at all. Nevertheless, there is plenty of room for both companies in the fastest consumer products business on the planet at present.

Yeah, but cj isn't the same really. He's more troll-adjacent. He's never seen a minor issue he couldn't exaggerate, and his appalling habit of mocking other people's grammar and/or intelligence when he runs out of his normal bile, is certainly jabba-worthy, but he's really not what I'm looking for. Gotta be one of the horrors you mentioned, or perhaps the ****** avatar if only bc we know he was a jabba's favourite cover band. Ooooh, I know what might work: perhaps blackswan can take some recent good news, reprint it, and then offer some vague, rhetorical question, purposely dripping with nasty innuendo, and then disappear like a coward when he gets called out for it. Not sure, but that might help a bit. Come to think of it, it already has.....

sorry, my bad. 9.5m

seriously, red? you do realise OF, even without that yuge transaction, is still one of the company's biggest shareholders with 8m shares, almost none of which were granted but rather bought in the market. Tosca purchase or no Tosca purchase, he's perfectly aligned with retail shareholders.

too much kumbaya around here. bring back jabba, just for a day, just for some mindless bile to balance things out a bit.....also of course, so I can rub his fat, ignorant face in the current share price. sorry, you guys carry on.....

Veterans here know my occasional reminders of sle's sector-leading performance in 2019, on the back of a massive tender offer, and last year on the back of massive special dividend, in an otherwise dire environment for O&G shares. This year however, the O&G sector is a market leader around the relevant markets (US, Canada, Oz, UK) and, despite a decent start to the year, sle has been a bit of a middle of league performer so far. Despite that though, I reckon shareholders well prefer the current situation, with Brent above $60 and sle playing catch-up in a overall improving sector, to the last-man-standing victories of the past

The Kanabo book closed 3 weeks ago and we were all scaled back by between 25 and 45%. Sorry

That's a reasonable assumption, mr hitman. As the UK broking sector has been devastated over the past decade however, 'upgrading' your brokerage services for a promising company like Zoetic has become a process resembling a battlefield promotion. Still, no disrespect but, Allenby is simply not equipped to adequately support this company any longer given where it is headed (e.g., Main List or possibly a co-list on NASDAQ) and so an upgrade is both necessary and likely in the offing.

on advfn

Thanks very much, daramunda. Very kind

oh, and I am completely of the same mind as you, JODO, to my priorities.

1. maybe so in principle, but in practice, what would they have said exactly? the AIM disclosure rules have tightened materially in the past few years preventing even well meaning 'updates' in many such circumstances if the wording must necessarily be vague or imprecise; 2. frankly, i do not believe there is anything preventing tosca from in fact selling the shares at any price they wish, i just don't believe they would do so at 21p in this case

Posted elsewhere this afternoon: '....IRONY ALERT - here's a small, but perfectly formed bit of reverse-info for all you lovers of Zoetic as well as irony: I have just finished reading winnifrith's 80-odd page whale turd and much much much more importantly, his follow-up commentary on his 'website' where he shakes his fist at his newest enemy and dares all who would doubt him, from the CEO to the small shareholder, to 'come and get me; that is, if you dare!' or playground sentiments to that effect. Well, contained within his now well-hewn airing of grievances, he lists the company's 'advisors', Allenby and Buchanan, prominently among those now duly warned that the Great Whinny doth point the sword of truth in their benighted direction. Well, here's the funny thing. If you have a look at Zoe's most recent RNSs from late last month, they clearly list IFC Advisory at the end as the Firm's financial PR, along with Allenby as their broker. No mention anywhere of Buchanan which, if anyone is unaware, is the pre-eminent financial PR firm in the City, bar none. As such, I would imagine that their OFFICIAL engagement would certainly have warranted an equally OFFICIAL RNS by now as their agreeing to take on such a young company as a client (don't they know that there are no revenues yet?!?!? Anal get on that would you?) seems pretty material, at least to me. So what do we have here? Well, it would appear that as a kind of delicious post-script to his spectacularly amateurish, mendacious and ultimately unsuccessful attack on this company, mr winnifrith would appear to have, likely through one of his many filthy sources, learned that Buchanan are either considering taking on Zoe as a client or have already decided but the news is not ready for release for whatever reason, and in his haste to release his 'kraken', like the bloated old elephant he is, he disclosed non-public information. You couldn't make it up. Meantime, I'm trying to check with the company, but for now 'yeah for Buchanan!' if it does actually happen....'

Stop already. First, you need to know that that is simply not the show-stopping question you seem to think it is. Of course you treat such announcements as written bc 99% of the time, they will be. This was simply a completly unique situation where the CEO was buying a material stake in his company from a fully compliant, super-majority shareholder and ran into a global health pandemic. Such a combination of events will never happen again so you needn't worry that your heretofore understanding of the world of press releases has been torn asunder, so relax, nothing has changed, and maybe you've learned something along the way.

qf. putting your argument to one side, bc it is irrelevant in its entirety, and see my previous explanations. no one 'waited' 7 months to announce anything. one or more of the group loaning oisin the dough seem to have - again, apparently due to covid - continued to string out the closing of their contribution. since this was a private transaction and the other party, tosca, was clearly accommodative of the unfortunate circumstances- particularly as they would have been fully aware that this would not affect the share in any material way since they also knew the shares would revert back to them and they were clearly fine with that - the NOMAD (as I and Al have reminded you multiple times), would have frequently reviewed the situation and judged all parties were making best efforts - YES, even over 7 months - to try and close the transaction in difficult market circumstances. By year's end, with perhaps one of the parties having officially withdrawn, sle put out the RNS we've seen, though they make it clear that bc tosca are completely supportive, a transaction can and may still happen. With that narrative being the only rational one based on the publicly disclosed information, with the NOMAD completely in charge of when/where/how, there is simply no reasonable way you can conclude that 'it remains wrong', which at least partly implies intent. Unfortunate maybe, regrettable for sure, but not wrong.